[NRO-IANAXFER] Fwd: [IANAxfer at apnic] ICANN Accountability Supplemental Final Proposal - Number, Community-Related Analysis

Richard Hill rhill at hill-a.ch
Wed Mar 2 10:17:00 CET 2016


Thank you for this.

Since the new version of the proposals is essentially the same as the
previous version of the proposals, I reiterate my previous comments, see:

 
http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-draft-ccwg-accountability-proposal-30n
ov15/pdftAXwe4oaMH.pdf 

Thanks again and best,
Richard

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ianaxfer-bounces at nro.net [mailto:ianaxfer-bounces at nro.net] On
> Behalf Of Izumi Okutani
> Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 09:58
> To: ianaxfer at nro.net
> Subject: Re: [NRO-IANAXFER] Fwd: [IANAxfer at apnic] ICANN Accountability
> Supplemental Final Proposal - Number, Community-Related Analysis
> 
> Dear Colleagues,
> 
> 
> The ASO liaisons to the CCWG note the release of the Final Report of
> the CCWG WS1 recommendations, and commend the working group for its
> efforts in its production of the report. The report may be found here
> https://community.icann.org/x/8w2AAw
> 
> As a chartering organization, the ASO has been requested to approve the
> Final Report of the CCWG recommendations on behalf of the number
> community, and by this message is now seeking any comments on concerns
> about this draft for consideration in this process. The ASO liaisons
> will provide any comments along with their recommendation by March 4th
> to the NRO EC for its consideration of this matter.
> 
> Please refer to the original message of "ICANN Accountability
> Supplemental Final Proposal - Number, Community-Related Analysis" for
> more details, which has been shared/to be shared on each regional
> mailing list.
> 
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Izumi Okutani
> An ASO representative to the CCWG
> 
> On 2016/03/01 13:00, Izumi Okutani wrote:
> > Dear Colleagues,
> >
> >
> > FYI, I would like to share it here on the global list - while I trust
> this post has been shared or to be shared in respective RIR Mailing
> lists.
> >
> > I would like to especially bring to your attention, the minority
> statement by the ASO to the CCWG's finalised proposal.
> > It is related to signing and implementation of the SLA on IANA
> Numbering Services, which ver.4 has been published on 25th Feb by NRO
> and shared on this list.
> >
> > Note that our minority statement is not directly related to contents
> of the recommendations in the CCWG proposal.
> > However, we believe it is important to clarify our point as the
> minority statement, given the number resources community rely on our
> SLA to fulfill our expectations of ICANN accountability.
> > Below is a recap of what we have stated, including the time frame of
> signing of the SLA (also shared in the attached email under 3)).
> >
> > "The ASO notes that the Internet Numbering Community is not relying
> on
> > the CCWG-ACCT WS1 proposal to fulfill our expectations of ICANN
> > accountability. Instead we will rely primarily on a contractual
> > agreement (or "SLA") between the RIRs and ICANN, as defined within
> the
> > CRISP and ICG proposals, to provide the required accountability
> mechanisms.
> >
> > In order to serve this purpose, the proposed SLA must be in place at
> > the time of the IANA Transition. However, the agreement contains
> > "condition precedent" language such that, even if it is signed
> > immediately, it will only come into effect when ICANN is actually
> > released from its related duties under the NTIA contract.
> >
> > Negotiation of the Numbers Community SLA is nearly complete, and we
> > expect to reach agreement in the near future. We propose to then
> > promptly sign the agreed SLA with ICANN, in the same timeframe as
> > implementation of the CCWG recommendations. By having both components
> > in place at that time, we will be satisfied that all ICANN
> > accountability matters are properly resolved."
> >
> > In addition, in the IANA Stewardship Transition context, the ICG will
> > secure confirmation from the CWG that its accountability requirements
> > have been met, before sending this proposal to the NTIA via the ICANN
> > Board: https://www.icann.org/stewardship
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Izumi
> >
> > -------- Forwarded Message --------
> > Subject: [IANAxfer at apnic] ICANN Accountability Supplemental Final
> > Proposal - Number, Community-Related Analysis
> > Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:08:48 +0900
> > From: Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic.ad.jp>
> > To: <ianaxfer at apnic.net> <ianaxfer at apnic.net>
> >
> > Dear colleagues,
> >
> > We would like to inform you that the Cross Community Working Group on
> > Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG) has published its Supplemental
> > Final Proposal, available here:
> > https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=58723723
> >
> > ----------------------------------------
> > Amendments from the third Draft Proposal
> > ----------------------------------------
> >
> > The ASO representatives to the CCWG communicated an analysis of the
> > third Draft Proposal on 16 December 2015:
> > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/cooperation-wg/2015-
> December/0
> > 00817.html
> >
> >
> > The following analysis relates to numbering-related amendments
> > introduced in the Supplemental Final Proposal since that earlier
> draft:
> >
> > 1) Mission statement
> >
> > ICANN's Mission with respect to numbers has been further clarified.
> It
> > now reads:
> >
> > "The Mission of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
> > Numbers
> > ("ICANN") is to ensure the stable and secure operation of the
> > Internet's unique identifier systems as described below.
> Specifically,
> > ICANN [.] Coordinates the allocation and assignment of the top-most
> > level of Internet Protocol ("IP") and Autonomous System ("AS")
> > numbers. In this role, ICANN provides registration services and open
> > access for global number registries as requested by the Internet
> > Engineering Task Force and the Regional Internet Registries and
> > facilitates the development of related global number registry
> policies
> > by the affected community as agreed with the RIRs".
> >
> > See Annex 05 - Recommendation #5:
> >
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/58723723/Annex%2005%2
> > 0-%20FINAL.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1456093917000&api=v2
> >
> > 2) Reconsideration process
> >
> > The scope of the Reconsideration process explicitly does not include
> > disputes related to Internet number resources.
> >
> > Please see Annex 08 - Recommendation #8:
> >
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/58723723/Annex%2008%2
> > 0-%20FINAL.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1456094541000&api=v2
> >
> > 3) Minority statement
> >
> > The ASO submitted the following minority statement into the CCWG
> > process, and it has been included in the Supplemental Final Proposal:
> >
> > "The ASO notes that the Internet Numbering Community is not relying
> on
> > the CCWG-ACCT WS1 proposal to fulfill our expectations of ICANN
> > accountability. Instead we will rely primarily on a contractual
> > agreement (or "SLA") between the RIRs and ICANN, as defined within
> the
> > CRISP and ICG proposals, to provide the required accountability
> mechanisms.
> >
> > In order to serve this purpose, the proposed SLA must be in place at
> > the time of the IANA Transition. However, the  agreement contains
> > "condition precedent" language such that, even if it is signed
> > immediately, it will only come into effect when ICANN is actually
> > released from its related duties under the NTIA contract.
> >
> > Negotiation of the Numbers Community SLA is nearly complete, and we
> > expect to reach agreement in the near future. We propose to then
> > promptly sign the agreed SLA with ICANN, in the same timeframe as
> > implementation of the CCWG recommendations. By having both components
> > in place at that time, we will be satisfied that all ICANN
> > accountability matters are properly resolved."
> >
> > -----------
> > Next steps
> > -----------
> >
> > The CCWG has sent the Supplemental Final Proposal to the working
> > group's six Chartering Organizations, including the ASO, and asked
> > them to consider and approve the document by 9 March 2016 in order to
> > meet the overall timing requirements, and allow the IANA Stewardship
> > Transition (as a whole) to proceed.
> >
> > In parallel, the CWG-Stewardship is expected to deliver its
> > confirmation that its dependencies have been met, in order to allow
> > the IANA Stewardship Transition proposal to move forward.
> >
> > The ASO representatives to the CCWG will soon send a recommendation
> to
> > the NRO EC regarding approval of the Supplemental Final Proposal.  If
> > you object to approval, please respond giving reasons.
> >
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Izumi Okutani
> > ASO representative to the CCWG
> > _______________________________________________
> > IANAxfer mailing list
> > IANAxfer at apnic.net
> > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ianaxfer mailing list
> > ianaxfer at nro.net
> > https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ianaxfer mailing list
> ianaxfer at nro.net
> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer




More information about the ianaxfer mailing list